The best way to stop any kind of Dutch roll (official term) is to actually let go of the controls.
If you're overcontrolling, the cure is to literally stop. The video of the Narita landing a few pages back was a pretty good (i.e. horrid) example of it. The corrections "the other way to stamp it out" are literally the problem, as they're being input before the aircraft settles, and instead of damping the motions, they'll add to them if you get out of phase.
Dutch rolling and overcontrolling in roll aren't the same thing, though one can lead to the other, and the cure is the same.
If you look at the QF6114 history on FR24, it's been used to do a lot of short flights between Melbourne and Avalon of late. At a guess, they'll be giving each of the already qualified 330 Captains/FO who are returning a couple of quick takeoffs and landings before sending them back out into the real world.
) - esp the low level fly-by at 2:-00.
There’s some interesting reading on the net about this subject. Weight-wise it isn’t a problem. Landing with about 20 tonnes of fuel, would give you a weight of around 270 tonnes. The max landing weight varied across the models of 747, but was somewhere between 250 and 290 tonnes. Structurally they’d obviously modify it to whatever standard they wanted. The 747 was quite benign at any mid to heavy landing weight.
AV has possibly operated there, and will be able to give more information. QF/Jetstar had specific requirements for anyone operating there, with sims covering the approaches, any possible go arounds and the various engine out permutations.
Unfortunately, I haven't operated there yet. At the moment, it's only Captain's take-offs and landings at ZQN anyway.
All aircraft are affected by crosswind in the same way, so it doesn't matter if it's an A380 or a 737. Even in very light crosswinds, you need to correct for their effects. It may be barely visible, but if you did nothing about a 1 knot crosswind, from 1,000', then by the time you reached the runway it would have moved you 140 feet downwind. You'd miss the runway entirely.
Less than a minute…so call it 500’. The cabin crew would not ring the coughpit, and even if they did, nobody would answer.
Strange to have been told anything about what the issues were. To any of the staff you’d interact with, it would simply be a technical problem, and that would almost certainly be the limit of their knowledge of any issue.
There were some door issues in the early days of the aircraft, but I never had any problem in 5,000 hours, so they certainly aren’t common. I don’t know anything about the doors that were sealed off, but the engineers would still be able to get access if they needed.
It seems to be a bit of a leap to assume the issue is door seals, when all you’ve been told is that it was ‘issues with a door’. An issue seems to have occurred twice. We don’t know if it was the same issue or not. There are numerous systems and sensors involved with doors.
The landing gear is taken around 2,000ft (roughly 3mins to landing). At that point, the cabin manager will announce "cabin crew be seated for landing". This indicates that the landing gear has been extended and the 'no contact' period has commenced.
Yes and no. In the aircraft that I flew, not a great deal of noise came through from the cabin. If you listened out for it, I guess you'd hear that something was being said, but I doubt that it would be all that clear. Or perhaps that was my hearing.
